Lemmings Forums
Lemmings Boards => Level Design => Topic started by: Nessy on July 06, 2017, 11:39:45 PM
-
So I have decided to try my hand at making my very first topic 8-).
What makes a level challenging?
A quick note: I am a firm believer that you don’t have to create a hard level in order for that level to be a good level. Still, I was curious to see the science behind making a level a worthy "speedbump".
One thing I noticed in some levels considered to be challenging is that a terrain is presented to you and you have very limited skills to use in it. I really like these levels because it forces you to really think about the skills you have, how to use them, where to use them, and sometimes how to combine them. In some areas it may look like you have to use a miner to clear a path, but what if another skill would work better so the miner can be used somewhere else? What if instead of bashing you can maybe dig up the path with a digger and use the basher for other parts of the terrain?
For example, in Postcard From Lemmingland you only get one builder, which means that you can’t easily build over the small wall and pit in the level. You have to focus on what you have instead of what you don’t have, so examining how the terrain looks and using what you have to craft a solution through it is where the challenge comes in. You can bash to the pit from the entrance, so how does that help? (In fact, you can beat this level without using the basher). A miner digs down diagonally, so how does that help? Lemmings turn around when they hit a wall even while building, so how does that help? To successfully beat the level all of these things have to be considered. Another example is The Great Lemming Caper. You only had two builders and builders are the only way to reach the exit, but they were not enough for both lemmings in the level. But what else did you have? You did have a lot of diggers, bashers, and miners. How can the digger, miner, basher, and even blocker skills help out so I can use those two builders wisely? Of course, that’s why No Added Colours Or Lemmings is considered by many people to be one of the best levels in the game. The game never told you that a lemming was automatically doomed if they were turned into a blocker, so using all of your skills wisely to reach the exit and save every lemming was the challenge.
Finally, I also think this is why Save Me is more challenging than Rendezvous At The Mountain. For Rendezvous At The Mountain you had a good amount of each skill to craft a solution. Save Me did not have a lot of different skills, and even the builders run out quickly. You also had the challenge of being forced to send more than one lemming to do work on different parts of the level, so that already puts a challenge in making sure you use every skill in a way as to effectively control the crowd enough to prevent too many of them from getting killed along the way.
Anyway, that’s my two cents on the subject manner. I might even be wrong.
-
I think "What makes a level challenging?" on the pure puzzle side comes down to 2 things:
1) Entropy
2) Trickery
1) "In statistical mechanics, entropy (usual symbol S) is related to the number of microscopic configurations Ω that a thermodynamic system can have when in a state as specified by some macroscopic variables."
Now my definition of "Entropy" for Lemming levels ;):
Entropy can be described as the pure ammount of possibilities (chaos) you have in a level. Of course a 20 of every skill level is usually not difficult, but I am rather talking about levels with a barely enough skillset that have a high ammount of possible (not actual) ways to solve them.
For example a level with limited skills that has great hints where you HAVE to put the skills has not a high Entropy. Like for example you have a water gap (no swimmers) and only 1 builder --> the builder HAS to be here --> lower Entropy.
If every skill of the level has multiple places it can be used in a manner that gets you really closer to your goal, that's the type of level that is really difficult. (If you have elimminated all backroutes and only the intended way is left of course ;))
So: Higher Entropy ---> Higher Difficulty (example would maybe be the 2nd last level of Reunion "Lemtris Version X" or the last levels of NepsterLems with a high entropy and an easy 1-of-everything level with clear usage places for every skill with a low entropy)
2) Of course difficult tricks increse the difficulty of the level, but there is another thing to be aware of here: If a person knows the trick a lot of the difficulty can get lost. Therefore concealing the trick should also be a goal. Sidenote: A level where the place for the trick is clear and maybe even be hinted at would be a good introduction level for it.
Let's take the last level of the first rank of Reunion for example:
In it's first iteration the starting area did not have it's metal plates --> the blocker or a digging skill was the obvious choice for containment.
What I wanted the player to use was a builder block: 3 builders after each other to make a 1-way wall and create a delay for the 1st lemming. This was considered to be too wasteful for most of the players --> good concealment of an easy trick.
I added the metal plates to lower the entropy (to hint at rule 1) and make the trick more clear --> blocker + digging tools were no longer an option and the level was now easier.
As you can see here is that point 1) Entropy can also be a great tool to hide your tricks ;). The other way would be in the terrain shape. "The Glacier Station" from the 3rd rank of Reunion would be a good example for hiding sth in the terrain without unfair methods.
Be careful with concealment: Don't actively hide things from the player. Hide it in plain sight! It's always visible, but not clear to the player. A bit like a "Where's Waldo" picture, just now you are searching for a solution or a place to use a trick in a helpful manner.
So the trick complexity (this also includes combination of tricks and maybe even multitasking) and trick concealment is a key to more difficulty.
I hope this helps and I got the main points to create difficulty. :) I would like to maybe hear other peoples definitions. ??? Maybe I missed a point.
-
I like your entropy analysis. I was attempting to explain that general concept a little bit but you articulated it much better.
I forgot about trickery and it does make sense, especially when it isn’t obvious but at the same time hidden in plain sight. That reminds me of I Have A Cunning Plan (sorry, haven’t played a lot of packs yet so I can’t give a lot of examples with variety) where a player would logically delay the lemmings with builders to allow the first one to bash through the wall, but at the same time many new players would still have some lemmings slip by, turn around, but then turn around again by hitting the wall created by the builders. The level can now be done more cleanly by using three or four (I think it differs depending on the version) builders as a "blocker". I suppose another example would be Compression Method I, where it was impossible to beat the level without going through the traps at the bottom, so the player had to figure out how to go through it without losing too many lemmings along the way (although on some ports you could backroute it by glitching through the steel on top :XD:).
By the way, for some reason I really liked that trick with creating a wall using builders and tried to create a level introducing it. Similar to your Reunion example, it wasn’t obvious but it did slowly lead you to that conclusion when you consider the nature of the terrain (using steel blocks to avoid containment through destructive skills) and fact that you have much more builders than needed for the level. I do plan on making another level where the same trick is involved but it builds on it by introducing another trick using it.
-
Hi Nessy
Welcome to the forum Nessy, like your avatar. :)
I'm a bit behind with a lot of the new things such as the Neolemmix and Lix levels which I notice a lot people talking about. I might get into it soon in the future. My level ideas might be a bit outdated as I've not really tried many of the new levels but I'll give it a go.
One of my things I tend to like is the whole idea that a level can have a lot of different solutions but I do like the more linear type levels where there is usually just the one solution but it is hard to complete.
One idea well I would probably only use this idea once if you were to create a level pack. The idea is the old hunt for the exit where you have a lot of different skills but are unsure where the exit is. I find those levels kind of fun where you are digging all over the place trying to find the exit. Mind you I think this could be a very unpopular idea if it is overly used. (Maybe once per level pack)
What about the idea where you are having to reach the exit, I think I tried this idea with a few of my old lemmini levels where the exit was up very high and you don't have many skills to get up to the top.
Oh that great lemming caper level was a very good level in that there are a few different ways to complete it. I played that level recently and one of the solutions I tried was to block one of the lemmings once he digs for a little bit, I managed to free him up and complete the level. :thumbsup:
-
One idea well I would probably only use this idea once if you were to create a level pack. The idea is the old hunt for the exit where you have a lot of different skills but are unsure where the exit is. I find those levels kind of fun where you are digging all over the place trying to find the exit. Mind you I think this could be a very unpopular idea if it is overly used. (Maybe once per level pack)
Intervention! :devil::devil:
Those kind of levels are one of the worst types! In the old engines you basically have to search blindly and without precise frame-stepping tools in the dark --> pure trial and error. Searching randomly for the exit is neither fun or a fair puzzle! Everything has to be visible to the player! This is one of the most holy rules of level design. No hidden exits, no hidden trpas, nothing is hidden! The levels difficulty has to come purely from the puzzle factor of the solution. Until now every new engine focused on making the execution side easier and focus purely on the puzzle itself. Also in NeoLemmix a quick press on the clear physics button would bring up the trigger area anyway making the search pointless.
To sum it up: Levels with hidden stuff are generally not well received and should be avoided.
One of my things I tend to like is the whole idea that a level can have a lot of different solutions but I do like the more linear type levels where there is usually just the one solution but it is hard to complete.
What about the idea where you are having to reach the exit, I think I tried this idea with a few of my old lemmini levels where the exit was up very high and you don't have many skills to get up to the top.
Well this is very general ;P You always have to reach the exit going in some direction and levels often have multiple solution ... although more difficulty ones tend to have only one with maybe only slight variations.
After a definition of difficulty in general maybe these level creation methods can be helpful:
- Focus and plan on one central trick. Choose the tileset and terrain layout on a trick you want to force in the level. Aditional puzzle elements can be build around it to create more complexity, but beware of backroutes!
- Build the terrain layout first and after the landscape is finished carve out a challenging solution.
Combining the 2 methods and make a drawing on paper first can also be helpful. Don't forget to add some nice decoration and maybe even a sweet music track! ;)
-
I would like to respectfully disagree with your take on hidden exits and traps. I personally (that's the key word) think that hidden exit levels can be fun and hidden traps are fair game provided they are used in good places (i.e. not in solid terrain and not at the very end in front of the exit). Hidden exit levels are a different kind of lemmings level, one that focuses a lot more on exploration than puzzle-solving. I know Lemmings is a puzzle game, but these unique levels are welcome provided you have a good amount of skills to mess around with.
Also, if you use my underwater tileset with the giant updraft, you will not be able to use clear physics to instantly find the exit. ;P
-
It's fair to say that hidden exits and traps are controversial and polarizing. Some may love it and others will really hate it. I also think exploration of hidden stuff works better in a non-Lemmings settings, such as most traditional games where you have direct control over a character's movements. In the long run, you are unlikely to be able to sustain a pack of many levels in a widely appreciated way merely by hidden stuff alone, so you're still going to need to find other ways to make things challenging and interesting.
-
I would like to respectfully disagree with your take on hidden exits and traps. I personally (that's the key word) think that hidden exit levels can be fun and hidden traps are fair game provided they are used in good places (i.e. not in solid terrain and not at the very end in front of the exit). Hidden exit levels are a different kind of lemmings level, one that focuses a lot more on exploration than puzzle-solving. I know Lemmings is a puzzle game, but these unique levels are welcome provided you have a good amount of skills to mess around with.
Also, if you use my underwater tileset with the giant updraft, you will not be able to use clear physics to instantly find the exit. ;P
What kind of "fair game" is a stomper coming out of nowhere? Even when it's at the start. I respect your personal opinion that they can be fun for you, although I don't understand where the fun comes from when you are getting screwed out of nowhere, but this is not a fair game by any means. This is never a fair game, you directly lie to the player about the path being safe.
It's like if you have a race and someone just trips you in the middle of it.
I you want to explore I agree wth ccexplore --> play a different game. + regarding underwater: I will find the exit, as overlappng triggers are brighter ;) True physics will always be there to shift the focus to the puzzle part, as it should be!
-
Hidden traps can complement the scenery of a level far better than visible ones sometimes. For example: the retractable boulder trap in the dirt tileset is designed as a hidden trap, hence why it looks identical to one of the terrain pieces. Making this trap visible looks horribly ugly to the terrain. Oftentimes traps are better set as invisible traps provided it makes the level looks less ugly or cluttered. For example: Compression Method I would look far less visually appealing if the mashers were hidden, and that level is regarded as one of the most recognizable and good levels from the game judging by how many homages to that level exist.
-
Functionality and fairness > looks and decoration.
Decoration and fairness are both key to a good level. If your level needs hidden stuff to look good, it shall be thought over again! I consider the retractable boulder trap in the dirt tileset a misdesign as you are right that it can look stupid if not partly hidden. The ten ton block or the bear trap are better traps in general for usage. They are better designed.
I also critizise Compression Method I for making the mashers hidden. Most of the original levels have design flaws. May it be hidden stuff, misplaced levels, or unnessesary timers. If I would re-release them I would change a lot of things in there :8(): I also think we make and have waaaay better levels than the original ones now.
Functionality and fairness > looks and decoration. That's also the reason I changed my mind and therefore I will change quite a bunch of decorational objects with the format change to be either terrain or have a visible animation and also support the option to blend them out completely.
-
Interesting debate, I think I'm on Colourful Arty's side but I can understand what Ichotolot is getting at. I agree that a lot of the new level packs beat the original ones as Ichotolot was saying.
I like that level the (X marks the spot), I remember having some sort of idea to the hidden flamethrower trap as you could see a part of the flame coming out. Maybe it might be classified as half hidden.
I loved that boulder trap (Rendezvous at the Mountain), I think it was seeing the blood of the lemmings when they get crushed. I sort of think of it as a decoration element to the level. Nice last level
I'm probably of the opinion where maybe one hidden exit level might be good in a level pack but if it is something that is over used it can be maybe off putting. I like the search around types like in the Martin Zurlinden's level pack, (Episode x the phantom exit) I really enjoyed that one.:)
I know a lot of people hate the walking bombers as well but I think the walking bomber levels are good in that you will be unsure of whereabouts is it going to explode. Sort of like the bombozal level as it felt unique back in the day. Maybe one walking bomb level might be an nice one as long as we don't overuse it as well. I guess the walking bombing thing made (A TOWERING PROBLEM) level hard.
I will admit (A TOWERING PROBLEM) level from oh no was never one of my favourites, I think it might of been one of my least favourite but the (Bomboozal) level is very very cool. :)
I think this one will be unpopular but quite a lot of the original levels might of used the old hero type levels where one lemmings does most of the work. I like an occasional hero level such the (What an awesome level) from the original one. THe four special levels from the original could be classified as a hero type one. Can't quite remember what we call hero levels, I'm sure it has another name in the lemmings community.
That Rick dangerous game was very bad for hidden traps :). :8:()[:
-
Those kind of levels are one of the worst types! In the old engines you basically have to search blindly and without precise frame-stepping tools in the dark --> pure trial and error. Searching randomly for the exit is neither fun or a fair puzzle! Everything has to be visible to the player! This is one of the most holy rules of level design. No hidden exits, no hidden traps, nothing is hidden! The levels difficulty has to come purely from the puzzle factor of the solution.
Original Lemmings isn't just a different game from NeoLemmix; it's a different genre. Judging it by the standards of a pure puzzle game like NeoLemmix is like faulting Star Wars for making it obvious who the villain is, when it isn't trying to be a mystery.
Original Lemmings, by the standards of its genre, is fair. The early levels cue the player as to what to expect on the later ones. Levels like Fun 17 tell the player that traps can be hidden, and they do so in a harmless way -- when you lose a lemming to the trap, you have plenty of tools to avoid the other lemmings following, and the level requires saving less than 50%. (And, of course, that particular level tells you where the traps are on Compression Method 1, which is its repeat.)
That said... the reason this community has stuck together and is still interested in the games all these years later is that, while there are many other games that scratch the same kind of itch original Lemmings does, there are far fewer other places for us to go when we want the same puzzle-solving stimulation we get from NeoLemmix and Lix. So naturally, today's community has a strong preference for levels that are more puzzle-oriented, and I completely agree that hidden traps are best avoided in NeoLemmix levels.
-
Seems like I caused a hot debate here ;)
Another thing that interests me are the levels that appear on the second-to-last difficulty (like in Taxing or Wicked). It seems like those levels are the hardest to design for because a lot of times levels considered to be misplaced come from there. They seem to be in a strange spot on the difficulty curve. Sometimes they seem like they belong in an easier rank and sometimes they seem like they belong in a later rank.
Usually the first rank is the easiest and sometimes (not always) teaches you the skills and hazards you will encounter (like the first few levels of Fun). The second difficulty is when some more complex puzzles are introduced that require more thought and planning than the first rank, but it isn't overwhelmingly hard. The last rank is usually the one that really pushes you to the limit in terms of high entropy and tricks. Finally, that second-to-last rank… what makes those levels that belong in a second-to-last rank and not the last rank? Would it be a rank that starts teaching the player some of the more complex tricks? Would it be a rank that is just more difficult than its previous rank and easier than its last rank? The latter might be more true and I'm just overthinking it.
-
If every skill of the level has multiple places it can be used in a manner that gets you really closer to your goal, that's the type of level that is really difficult.
More than any other argument or explanation of the discussion above, I feel that this sentence sums up perfectly my take on the title question.
Another thing that interests me are the levels that appear on the second-to-last difficulty (like in Taxing or Wicked). It seems like those levels are the hardest to design for [...] Finally, that second-to-last rank… what makes those levels that belong in a second-to-last rank and not the last rank? [...]
Your descripütion of the ranks is pretty much spot-on for the original lemmings, and holds at least to some degree for ONML, too. But I am not so sure, that there even exists some defining characteristic of second-to-last rank levels.
My own approach to level pack creation is very pragmatic: Make lots of levels without worrying about their difficulty, then sort them into ranks roughly according to their difficulty and finally rearrange them according to player feedback. I know that at least some others here use basically the same approach, so we should ask ourselves: Did the creators of L1 and ONML do basically the same thing, and just didn't do enough rearrangements at the end? The very chaotic order of the levels in which they were stored in the DOS version of L1 seems to suggest exactly that. So looking for defining characteristics of Taxing/Wicked levels might not yield good results. :P
-
If every skill of the level has multiple places it can be used in a manner that gets you really closer to your goal, that's the type of level that is really difficult.
I agree with that statement.
Lets see if I did the quote thing right.
-
My own approach to level pack creation is very pragmatic: Make lots of levels without worrying about their difficulty, then sort them into ranks roughly according to their difficulty and finally rearrange them according to player feedback. I know that at least some others here use basically the same approach, so we should ask ourselves: Did the creators of L1 and ONML do basically the same thing, and just didn't do enough rearrangements at the end? The very chaotic order of the levels in which they were stored in the DOS version of L1 seems to suggest exactly that. So looking for defining characteristics of Taxing/Wicked levels might not yield good results. :P
Honestly, it would be very hard to imagine anyone creating 80 levels (ignoring the repeats) in a perfect or near-perfect difficulty order right on the outset. Therefore it is much more likely that the levels are rearranged at least a few times before settling into the current in-game ordering. It's also possible that they may intentionally interspersed some slightly easier levels every now and then to avoid the hard levels getting too discouraging (after all, if you can't skip to the next level, getting stuck really means you're stuck, and having some "breather" levels may be good to keep the player encouraged).
Judging and perhaps more importantly, tweaking level difficulty is perhaps also harder for a game like Lemmings. For platformers it's often just about the number of enemies plus how fast and hard they attack you and can withstood attack, plus less forgiving movements required (eg. smaller platforms you are proned to slip off of, say). RPGs are in particular a case where you can often easily tweak the difficulty by tweaking the stats of your enemies relative to the expected progression of stats and capabilities of your players at particular points in the game. For a Lemmings-like game, while we've been able to identify some ways (like on this very discussion thread) for which a level is likely more difficult than another, I think in general it can be harder to judge or tweak difficulties, especially if you also have to worry about things like backroutes. This is especially the case if you want to focus the difficult more on finding a solution and less on ease of execution. Some of the more obvious ways to tweak a level's difficulty include higher save requirements and less skills given (or particular types of skills not available altogether), all of which are in fact used with the official levels (especially in L1 where the earlier-ranked levels are often easier repeats of later levels with more generous skillset and save requirements). Even then, those methods tend to either create much easier levels, or else resulting in a level that isn't really all that different difficulty-wise, and thus rarely creates a situation where you can meaningfully fine-tune the difficulty.
-
Make lots of levels without worrying about their difficulty, then sort them into ranks roughly according to their difficulty and finally rearrange them according to player feedback.
This does make sense. If you design a level with a "it's going to be a final rank level" state of mind then you limit your creative freedom and miss out on a chance to make a really solid level that will be great for another rank or something.
Honestly, it would be very hard to imagine anyone creating 80 levels (ignoring the repeats) in a perfect or near-perfect difficulty order right on the outset. Therefore it is much more likely that the levels are rearranged at least a few times before settling into the current in-game ordering. It's also possible that they may intentionally interspersed some slightly easier levels every now and then to avoid the hard levels getting too discouraging (after all, if you can't skip to the next level, getting stuck really means you're stuck, and having some "breather" levels may be good to keep the player encouraged).
Yes, I would imagine that no one can create 80 or 120 levels with a perfect difficulty order, just because of the nature of the game. Your example of RPGs was a good example as the difficulty can be tweaked with higher stats and higher AI throughout the procession of the game, but for something like Lemmings there are just more factors to be considered and its difficulty progression can't all be done on the first go.
-
I find it especially hard to order difficulty of levels properly on the first try. Many times I've made levels that I thought were pretty simple because they just contain one little trick or bit of misdirection that trips up my testers way more than I thought it would. That's why it's good to have multiple people test your levels out; you alone as the level designer are not going to be the best judge of its difficulty because you know how it is supposed to be done. By the same token you can blind yourself to potential backroutes. That has also happened to me many times. ;)
-
Hi everyone, since I'm currently making my first steps into level design (i.e. I'm getting close to that magical 120 levels-mark where one could turn the whole lot into a pack), I'd like to chime in, especially regarding the "hidden exits" controversy. While I agree that clueless digging in a vast landscape searching for the exit is just exhausting, I'd say as long as a level designer stays true to the "ethics" of the original Lemmings game, this problem shouldn't even occur. And that principle is: Giving enough hints for the search.
IIRC there are only two levels with hidden exits in the original game, three if you consider the Fun version of "X marks the spot". The other one is obviously "Lost something?" Both maps however give quite clear hints about where the exit might be - one even says it in its name, and the other one, "Lost something?", has the platform where the exit is hidden under the dirt as a very exposed location in the level. After all, if I were to play this level for the first time, I'd rather start searching in a small piece of terrain, thereby finding the exit right away in this case, than digging through the entire ground first.
Actually, I kinda like hiding exits now, especially when it makes sense from a "flavour" standpoint, like searching for a treasure on an island (Beach tileset). You could even use the X from the Fire tileset to literally "mark the spot" in this case :D . Another way I like to use them is to simulate "entering into something". Like that ufo from the Space tileset, a building from the Shadow tileset, and so on. Just give enough hints to point the player towards that special piece of terrain.
My brother who has spent a lot more time playing the original games than I did has already agreed to playtest my levels, so I'll see how long it will take him to find the exits. I hope I made it obvious enough, if not I might have to add in some more hints. But I don't see the point in cutting this feature categorically. Especially when creating levels for adept Lemmings players, I like to make them think outside the box. Like diving beneath a trap trigger using stoners to force the swimmers down. Or using Zombies with skills (e.g. Disarmer) to your own advantage :D . (Was really sorry to find out they can't trigger pickup-skills or exit unlock-buttons ^^. But at least they interact with traps and teleporters.)
Finally, concerning "hidden traps":
Remember that Nessie tilepiece from the Highland set? It is originally just terrain, but I used to think it was a trap since I confused it with the chameleon / lizard from the Oh No-Rock-Set. But funnily enough, you can actually turn Nessie into a trap by putting that chameleon head behind it. Since both are green, it even looks quite convincing when it opens its jaw.
Would you guys consider that a "hidden" trap already? ;) I mean, that Nessie does look kinda like it's up to no good anyway, doesn't it? :D
Yeah, you might get surprised the first time you step on the trigger that Nessie has suddenly become hungry :D , but then you will certainly remember. In original Lemmings it would lead to not more than a single restart; in NeoLemmix, with the rewind feature, shouldn't that be even less of a problem? ;)
-
I just realized that I never gave my opinion about hidden exits/traps.
Well, personally I don't like hidden traps. On some levels I was okay with it at best, but on other levels like that icicle trap in the first level of Havoc it was just stupid and unnecessary and added nothing meaningful to the level. Regarding hidden exits I was never a fan myself but I do understand what your saying about using hints like the alternate exit in "X Marks The Spot". I actually found it more annoying when you reach an exit that you can clearly see but a few pixels of terrain is covering the exit trigger area (I'm looking at some of the snow levels from Oh No! More Lemmings :XD:).
Remember that Nessie tilepiece from the Highland set? It is originally just terrain, but I used to think it was a trap since I confused it with the chameleon / lizard from the Oh No-Rock-Set. But funnily enough, you can actually turn Nessie into a trap by putting that chameleon head behind it. Since both are green, it even looks quite convincing when it opens its jaw.
Would you guys consider that a "hidden" trap already? ;) I mean, that Nessie does look kinda like it's up to no good anyway, doesn't it? :D
Ha ha, I thought the same exact thing when I first played. Regarding whether it would be a good trap is a bit in the gray. On one hand the Nessie does look suspicious enough, but on the other hand we know it isn't a trap so someone might still get caught off when it suddenly becomes one. I think it would be a good idea to introduce it at the beginning of an early level right off the bat to show players that it's going to be used as a trap.
-
It's worth noting that newer versions of NeoLemmix make hidden / misleading stuff quite pointless - the player can very quickly locate and detect it by using Clear Physics Mode, which basically takes away any graphical abstraction and reveals the raw functional aspects of the level. You can, of course, ask the player not to do so, but there's no way to outright prevent it - and there are no plans to add such an option either (it would defeat the purpose of having such a mode in the first place).
-
While I agree that clueless digging in a vast landscape searching for the exit is just exhausting, I'd say as long as a level designer stays true to the "ethics" of the original Lemmings game, this problem shouldn't even occur. And that principle is: Giving enough hints for the search.
1.) We aren't staying true to the "ethics" of the original Lemmings games anymore. NeoLemmix and Lix are developing into a pure puzzle game. That's why we actively patch out and fix things that getting in the way of the true puzzle. That starts with percentage based save requirements, goes over the addition of frame-stepping and true physics mode, editing tilesets to make them more clear and so on...
2.) Even with hints it results in a blind digging based on hints that is just there to fool the player and streching out the time for no reason. Furthermore in NeoLemmix a simple press on the button for true physics mode nullifies the whole hiding process as it shows the exits trigger area. And yes the true physics mode even exist's partly for the reason to reveal hidden exits/trap levels --> point 1.)
IIRC there are only two levels with hidden exits in the original game, three if you consider the Fun version of "X marks the spot". The other one is obviously "Lost something?" Both maps however give quite clear hints about where the exit might be - one even says it in its name, and the other one, "Lost something?", has the platform where the exit is hidden under the dirt as a very exposed location in the level. After all, if I were to play this level for the first time, I'd rather start searching in a small piece of terrain, thereby finding the exit right away in this case, than digging through the entire ground first.
"X marks the spot" has 2 visible + rechable exits on the left side making the hidden one kinda pointless. "Lost something" is one of the really pointless levels as it gives you enough skills for days to reach a exit hidden in a very reachable position. Hiding the exit does not change the level here or make it more dificult/interesting in any way.
Actually, I kinda like hiding exits now, especially when it makes sense from a "flavour" standpoint, like searching for a treasure on an island (Beach tileset). You could even use the X from the Fire tileset to literally "mark the spot" in this case :D . Another way I like to use them is to simulate "entering into something". Like that ufo from the Space tileset, a building from the Shadow tileset, and so on. Just give enough hints to point the player towards that special piece of terrain.
My brother who has spent a lot more time playing the original games than I did has already agreed to playtest my levels, so I'll see how long it will take him to find the exits. I hope I made it obvious enough, if not I might have to add in some more hints. But I don't see the point in cutting this feature categorically. Especially when creating levels for adept Lemmings players, I like to make them think outside the box. Like diving beneath a trap trigger using stoners to force the swimmers down. Or using Zombies with skills (e.g. Disarmer) to your own advantage :D . (Was really sorry to find out they can't trigger pickup-skills or exit unlock-buttons ^^. But at least they interact with traps and teleporters.)
Here you miss the point of creating a lemmings puzzle. It's not about searching a treasure, it's about clever (not blindly) altering terrain with the help of lemming abilities to make a path from (known) point A to (known) point B. An X makes the hiding aspect even more pointless as a little visible cave with a 100% visible exits accomplishes the same.
Don't make a fool out of your brother! Be fair to him and beat him with a true puzzle, not mindless searches. If he encounters such a level he really should just press the true physics button and solve it in a second. :8():
Hiding stuff is also not thinking outside the box, it's just making a fool out of the player. Thinking outside of the box is using skills or a combination of skills in a manner that they aren't usually used. The builder+miner trick would be an example.
Finally, concerning "hidden traps":
Remember that Nessie tilepiece from the Highland set? It is originally just terrain, but I used to think it was a trap since I confused it with the chameleon / lizard from the Oh No-Rock-Set. But funnily enough, you can actually turn Nessie into a trap by putting that chameleon head behind it. Since both are green, it even looks quite convincing when it opens its jaw.
Would you guys consider that a "hidden" trap already? ;) I mean, that Nessie does look kinda like it's up to no good anyway, doesn't it? :D
Yeah, you might get surprised the first time you step on the trigger that Nessie has suddenly become hungry :D , but then you will certainly remember. In original Lemmings it would lead to not more than a single restart; in NeoLemmix, with the rewind feature, shouldn't that be even less of a problem? ;)
Making nessy a trap in some of the levels is one of the worst things you can do. Either nessy is a trap or isn't. Nothing inconsistent in between. Yes there is again true physics mode, but what is terrain and what's a trap should be consistent. Once you learned X is terrain, X should always be terrain. Because of the rule of consistency it's 100% a hidden trap. Players learned A and got B because of manipulation.
----> Please don't do it! Even with rewind it's still annoying as hell, especially if you formed a solution in your head before executing and the hidden trap got in your way! :devil:
Over all the old sin of hiding exits/traps is actively developed against with rewinding and true physics mode and we are today at a point where hiding stuff is only a annoyance and can be counteracted ---> why adding annoyances to your pack and actively make it worse? True physics is always there to counteract these things and make them not adding anything positive to the level.
Don't make your stuff worse! Out with hidden traps and exits! :8(): Rely on Entropy and tricks to form your puzzle.
I've played most of the original games and thousands (I am not overexaggerating here) of custom levels, which includes most of the packs uploaded on this site where I am also mentioned in the credits as a pre-release tester. I really want to advice you to free your pack from hidden things, they are no good to you. That was one of the things I learned and understood first when I came here :)
-
I'd rather tend to making Nessie a trap consistenly then. However, it still differs from a normal trap, because the head is terrain you can walk on while other traps are just objects that can be walked through.
There is however some inconsistency in the tilesets themselves. Take for example the Menacing set: There are snakes that are terrain and there are snakes that are traps (the ones looking sideways). A first time player will still need some time to figure this out, especially since you can't walk at all on the heads of the trap snakes, while the others are stable terrain.
The features like replay, rewinding and true physics mode are blessing and curse at the same time, I'd say. For me, they are mainly "anti frustration tools", saving you from annoyances. Purists of the original game would probably consider them cheats; you could make a case that in the original Lemmings, the frustration of missing an activation at a crucial point was part of the experience of the game.
Also, what the point of a level is is kinda subjective, isn't it? Take the cross promotion levels from Lemmings (Beasts, Menacing, and Awesome). None of them is particularly difficult, but they look cool, they have an unexpected change of music, they just mix things up.
I understand your point of view of NeoLemmix being all about puzzles, since I used to play Star Wars: Pit Droids back in the day (or now again on the iPad). There the levels are even called "puzzles" and you have to place all skills beforehand (=like "before Lemmings even come out of the trap door"). It's all about "solve in your head first, then execute". However, the type of challenge these puzzles pose is always very similar. There are no "quick reaction" challenges in Pit Droids, there is barely "learning by doing" or "trial and error".
In NeoLemmix, also levels like We all fall down are pointless, because it's totally obvious what you have to do and you can play the entire level with the pause button switched on, rewind every time a single lemming splats etc. But just because you can, should you? It's clear this wasn't the point of the original level. It's the old "with great power comes great responsibility" thing ;) .
The NeoLemmix features imho are both an argument for and against "annoyances". You could say it makes them pointless, or you could say it makes them unproblematic, because whenever one is fed up searching for the exit, they can use the true physics tool, while those who like this type of level can keep on trying the "original" way, a.k.a. the hard way ;) .
I used to create levels in WinLems, which doesn't have these features and only has manual steel rendering. This invited me to create levels wih bashable steel - or with normal terrain that can't be bashed through. So I created this level called "Hallowed Ground"; it even says in the title that there might be a reason this doesn't work as usual ;) . Yes, my brother had to rethink for a second, but he made it through without major frustration.
PS: "X marks the spot" also has a hidden trap, that fire trap, that is even hidden behind a supposed exit on the left side. The level gives you a hint for the exit on the right, but at the same time fools you to believe there were exits behind the Xs on the left, too - instead, one has nothing behind it, and the other one, even worse, has a trap instead. Oops, the first time you try, you're screwed - but then you'll remember.
-
I'd rather tend to making Nessie a trap consistenly then. However, it still differs from a normal trap, because the head is terrain you can walk on while other traps are just objects that can be walked through.
There is however some inconsistency in the tilesets themselves. Take for example the Menacing set: There are snakes that are terrain and there are snakes that are traps (the ones looking sideways). A first time player will still need some time to figure this out, especially since you can't walk at all on the heads of the trap snakes, while the others are stable terrain.
That misses the point: If YOU make nessy consistently a trap, it breaks the consistency with all other levels. Also for me I must say nessy never seem much trappy to begin with. There is only one snake in the menacing tileset that is a trap and it comes with a trigger activation button and rages above facing the lemmings like no other snake. It's still not a perfect trap though.
The features like replay, rewinding and true physics mode are blessing and curse at the same time, I'd say. For me, they are mainly "anti frustration tools", saving you from annoyances. Purists of the original game would probably consider them cheats; you could make a case that in the original Lemmings, the frustration of missing an activation at a crucial point was part of the experience of the game.
Also, what the point of a level is is kinda subjective, isn't it? Take the cross promotion levels from Lemmings (Beasts, Menacing, and Awesome). None of them is particularly difficult, but they look cool, they have an unexpected change of music, they just mix things up.
No curse, all blessing. It makes levels with hidden stuff bearable and even superfluous.
The hidden trap/exit discussion came up time and time again and those levels vanished over time in favor of pure puzzle levels. They left because people were more and more fed up with them and became nearly extinct. The point of the level in today's Lix and NeoLemmix culture is the puzzle itself, not the execution, everything was developed in that direction and levels like Awesome are simply easy puzzles with good visulas.
The general experience of the game changed as well. If you want the excecution to be relevant again then the old Lemmix player or Lemmini suites that purpose. NeoLemmix and Lix aren't made for the pure Purist experience.
I understand your point of view of NeoLemmix being all about puzzles, since I used to play Star Wars: Pit Droids back in the day (or now again on the iPad). There the levels are even called "puzzles" and you have to place all skills beforehand (=like "before Lemmings even come out of the trap door"). It's all about "solve in your head first, then execute". However, the type of challenge these puzzles pose is always very similar. There are no "quick reaction" challenges in Pit Droids, there is barely "learning by doing" or "trial and error".
In NeoLemmix, also levels like We all fall down are pointless, because it's totally obvious what you have to do and you can play the entire level with the pause button switched on, rewind every time a single lemming splats etc. But just because you can, should you? It's clear this wasn't the point of the original level. It's the old "with great power comes great responsibility" thing ;) .
If a game gives you the tools, I will use them at all times. If I can, I will. This wasn't the point of the original level? Well then it's outdated and should either be culled or reedited. And yes the original isn't holy for me anymore, we are much better as the original games today. I can proudly say that.
The NeoLemmix features imho are both an argument for and against "annoyances". You could say it makes them pointless, or you could say it makes them unproblematic, because whenever one is fed up searching for the exit, they can use the true physics tool, while those who like this type of level can keep on trying the "original" way, a.k.a. the hard way ;) .
I used to create levels in WinLems, which doesn't have these features and only has manual steel rendering. This invited me to create levels wih bashable steel - or with normal terrain that can't be bashed through. So I created this level called "Hallowed Ground"; it even says in the title that there might be a reason this doesn't work as usual ;) . Yes, my brother had to rethink for a second, but he made it through without major frustration.
PS: "X marks the spot" also has a hidden trap, that fire trap, that is even hidden behind a supposed exit on the left side. The level gives you a hint for the exit on the right, but at the same time fools you to believe there were exits behind the Xs on the left, too - instead, one has nothing behind it, and the other one, even worse, has a trap instead. Oops, the first time you try, you're screwed - but then you'll remember.
They are never unproblematic! They still disturb the flow of the level and the solving process, just to a lesser degree. And no searching blindly for an exit is not the hard way, it's the annoying way. Hard would be an unobvoius fair solution to even get to the visible exit in the first place. There are differences in the term difficulty. Hiding stuff is the false and annoying way.
Yes, we all made those levels back in the day, realised they are, let's say, "subobtimal" and improved since then.
Sry never thought about ANY of the Xes in X marks the spot. Just went for the visible exits and solved the level. "The first time you're screwed" and that's 1 time too much! The creators lied to the players just to waste their time!
You can create difficulty so much better with fair tools. Don't believe me? Play the last levels of NepsterLems in the Black Hole rating for example and you will see the true pure meaning of fair difficulty! ;)
http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2508.0
-
Take for example the Menacing set: There are snakes that are terrain and there are snakes that are traps (the ones looking sideways). A first time player will still need some time to figure this out, especially since you can't walk at all on the heads of the trap snakes, while the others are stable terrain.
That's good feedback -- but on this forum, the response is more likely to be "okay, let's improve the tileset" rather than "okay, let's make more tilesets with similar mistakes".
Purists of the original game would probably consider them cheats; you could make a case that in the original Lemmings, the frustration of missing an activation at a crucial point was part of the experience of the game.
This goes back to my point (on the previous page) that NeoLemmix and Lix are a different genre from original Lemmings. Yes, it was very much a part of the original game that some levels required placing skills precisely ("Livin' on the Edge") or estimating walking bombers, and the fact that you had to try until you got it right served as an incentive for mastering these skills. NeoLemmix is designed to be a different experience, for a different audience.
As I mentioned, the early levels of original Lemmings cue the player in as to what to expect for the rest of the game: lots of trapping the crowd and paving the way with a single lemming, and any low ceiling might conceal a trap. For new players who start with the NeoLemmix introduction pack, this instead cues the player to expect the kind of levels the present-day community is designing for NeoLemmix.
In NeoLemmix, also levels like We all fall down are pointless, because it's totally obvious what you have to do and you can play the entire level with the pause button switched on, rewind every time a single lemming splats etc. But just because you can, should you? It's clear this wasn't the point of the original level. It's the old "with great power comes great responsibility" thing ;) .
Well, that's why "We all fall down" is an original Lemmings level, not a NeoLemmix level. If you want, you can have a look at the Lemmings Redux (http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2614.msg64694#msg64694) project; it's not finished, but we've put together the "best" 150 levels of the original games (including Oh No, Genesis etc) and compiled them into a single pack. When it's done, we will encourage new NeoLemmix users who want to experience the original levels to play them in this version. Of course, "best" just means according to the tastes of this community -- and potential newcomers who want to experience this kind of gameplay.
Also, what the point of a level is is kinda subjective, isn't it? Take the cross promotion levels from Lemmings (Beasts, Menacing, and Awesome). None of them is particularly difficult, but they look cool, they have an unexpected change of music, they just mix things up.
It's absolutely subjective (and I loved those levels when I was a kid -- except Menacing because I hated its music, although I kind of like it now). (Several NeoLemmix packs do include special graphics / music levels, and we've decided to keep them in the Redux pack.)
However, if you release content to the NeoLemmix community, to a certain extent you have to conform to the community's tastes, especially as you'll find a couple of people (like IchoTolot above) who are extremely outspoken about what they like and don't like.
You could say it makes them pointless, or you could say it makes them unproblematic, because whenever one is fed up searching for the exit, they can use the true physics tool, while those who like this type of level can keep on trying the "original" way, a.k.a. the hard way.
When I was a kid first playing original Lemmings, it felt like time was unlimited and I could spend as much as I wanted playing games. Now, though? Give me a hidden exit and a single click that reveals it, and I'll hit it every time.
-
Okay, it's certainly good to now the priorities each community has ;) . I guess I'd just put some kind of disclaimer on my pack if I release it, because it features all kinds of stuff people might take "issue" with. From mechanical stuff like hidden exits and reaction speed to extensive use of Zombies to mockery level titles, kinda like with "All the 6's" in the original.
Players just should know in advance what they're signing up for :) , so everyone can choose and try the packs they are going to enjoy the most. As long as these aren't "design dogmas" or the admins delete any pack that doesn't conform to the "no time limit/hidden exits or traps/pixel precision" creed, we should be fine, right?
I respect the ambition to be able to solve each level on the first trial by thinking it through. Personally however, I believe the satisfaction about solving it is often even higher when it takes several trials. Something I learned while playing Divinity II: Ego Draconis: You get stuck first with a certain part and believe "this is the point where I'm going to fail and stop". But then, shortly before giving up, you barely make it through. And that's what keeps motivating you and gets you addicted to play through the entire game despite its extensive length.
I feel like that's what people meant by "making your levels 'worse' deliberately": Annoy the player more on purpose first, in order to make success even more rewarding afterwards. There is obviously less instant gratification with that philosophy.
The reason I use NeoLemmix nevertheless rather than other engines is because of the vast choice of tilesets, plus the bonus skills and all the new challenges they offer, like Stoners and Cloners.
-
I respect the ambition to be able to solve each level on the first trial by thinking it through. Personally however, I believe the satisfaction about solving it is often even higher when it takes several trials.
Icho's point is that, as a benchmark to distinguish fair from unfair difficulty, we can ask: Could a perfect solver work out the level just from looking it over and thinking it out?, i.e. all the information needed to solve the level should be presented.
That doesn't mean we are perfect solvers! On the contrary, a big part of the enjoyment of modern levels is that feeling of being stuck, trying things out and slowly probing towards a solution, and then getting a sudden flash of insight that makes the various things you've been trying click together.
-
I know nobody claims to be a perfect solver. Instead, the idea is that a hypothetical perfect solver should be able to tackle a level right away, i.e. a perfect solver shouldn't have to practice a level. In reality however, as we know, practice makes perfect. So of course there should be things to figure out right away just by looking at them. I don't see the problem however with having to "go" somewhere (=i.e. "send a lemming there") to find out about some of the remaining stuff. The state of looking at the level while the trap door is still closed is kinda the "ivory tower"; then you unleash the horde and oops... reality might interfer with what you first came up with at the drawing board :D .
To me this is a bit like playing chess vs. playing Magic: The Gathering :) . In chess, all the options are on the table all the time, for everyone to see, and it can only be each player's individual fault for not seeing something. In Magic, you might also have a strategy from the getgo - but your opponent still has something to contribute. In Lemmings, your opponent is the level ;) , and all the traps, tricks and nasty surprises it has up its sleeve. And since I enjoy playing Magic more than I do playing chess, I think it's obvious why I also favour levels that occasionally have such "surprises" in them that mess up your entire preceding strategy.
A thing about "snowed in"-exits, i.e. where you can see the exit, but the trigger is buried: I just finished working on a level where the exit trigger being buried in the ground actually made the level easier than without. I had a basher digging through several pillars, while the gaps in between had to be closed by stoners simultaneously (pretty cool timing / multi-tasking thing there). This makes the basher dig all the way through (you only have a single one). Now, without the buried trigger, the basher would bash past it and thereby make the exit inaccessible. The only remaining skills were bombers, and bombing the basher somehow altered the terrain in a way that did not create "mini-steps" for lemmings to walk over, so they were stuck right beneath the exit. By flushing the trigger into the ground however, the basher who cannot be stopped anyway sort of makes the exit accessible by accident :D . And once he hits it, him exiting the level stops him from bashing.
Also, at the beginning of that level, the lemmings fall onto a splat pad right from the trap door. There's an anti-splat pad hidden in the ground right underneath. The player doesn't know this. But since you don't have any floaters or gliders, only bombers at the start, and the lemmings fall from the trap door right to their doom, there's not much else you can try to do before you find out the pad is there. ;)
-
No one will ever delete any pack/topic , because it contains unliked levels.
The only thing we do is to give feedback and advice based on our experiences here.
I am known for being very direct (well in fact most german people are on this site ;P), I rather speak about my true opinion on something rather than being silent even if I can sound kinda harsh. If I see packs/levels which can be improved, I say something and I don't lie to your face.
If you want to hide stuff I cannot stop you or anyone else, I only can tell you about my experiences, the reasons why it's better not to dot it and to focus on the honest things which give the levels their true beauty.
-
@IchoTolot: Ich hätte jetzt nicht unbedingt gedacht, dass das eine typisch deutsche Eigenschaft ist, aber ich begrüße es auf jeden Fall! ;)
(Translation: I didn't necessarily consider directness a typically German quality, but I welcome it anyway.)
I will obviously consider removing or refining levels from my pack if they turn out to be "too mean" by several people's standards. That's something always difficult to estimate for the creator of a level who knows where all the mean things are. Apart from that, I'll see where my pack goes and probably it will just become something different for in between all the puzzling the other packs provide.
I've looked at the Black Hole level you mentioned (I guess "Mining Company" was the one you meant), and I get that this is the way to get the maximum out of especially the classic 8 skills, using those in new and creative ways.
In my pack I want to focus more on the new skills, or a healthy mixture of old and new skills, plus all the new objects, like Zombies, radiation etc., and all the whacky things you can do with them. That's what I meant by "making seasoned players think outside the box". It's less about "how do I use this familiar tool in new ways", instead "how can I learn to use this new tool effectively in the first place?"
Radiation and slowfreeze, if not handled precisely, are just another form of traps that kill your Lemmings - even worse so for Zombies. On the other hand, being a glider will save a lemming in one instance and kill it in the next one by sailing right into a trap.
-
To me this is a bit like playing chess vs. playing Magic: The Gathering :). [...]
I can see what you are getting at, but this conflicts somewhat with the philosophy we chose for NeoLemmix or Lix. IchoTolot mentioned this already in previous posts, but I would like to give a bit more details:
In German we have the phrase "eierlegende Wollmilchsau" (literally translated as "egg-laying, wooly, milk-giving pig") for something that tries to do everything, but usually fails horribly at all of them. The upshot is to determine the key features of a product and focus on them, because there will be other products that focus on other aspects and usually will be better at them.
Chess was created around the premise that everyone has the full knowledge about the game at any time, while Magic focuses on the question "How can I adapt my strategy given more and more knowledge about the opponent's strategy?". Both of them are successful, because they never lost the focus on their core feature.
Now, I certainly don't want to say that the original Lemmings game is bad in any way. But it is primilarly a puzzle game, so when we added features, the community decided to strenghten this aspect of the game. At first I myself was sceptical regarding a few of the changes, but now I very glad about them.
- Clear physics mode removes indeed the explorative aspect of the game. But Lemmings was never a game where you could explore a lot. More or less hidden exits and traps are the only things that could be "found" by lemmings during playing a level, which is pretty restrictive. So if someone wants to explore maps, I would encourage them to play other games that focus on this aspect instead of Lemmings.
- Instant bombers and framestepping remove the executional aspect of the game almost completely, as you noticed with "We all fall down". Clearly this was a big part of the original game, and the original game doesn't vanish just because NeoLemmix exists, so anyone can still play it if they want this challenge. With all the Lemmix levels (which faithfully copies the original physics) it became appearant that there cannot be created a lot of new content that adds something new to what L1 and ONML already did in this regard. On the other hand, bomber timing and similar became annoying in levels that mainly focused on the puzzling aspect. To satisy the needs of the pure puzzlers, instant bombers, ... were added. Of course this changed the genre of the game somewhat, as Proxima already remarked.
- Finally it turned out that even with all these changes to the original game and the narrow focus on the puzzling aspect, a lot of very diverse levels can be created.
I wrote all of this to explain why we made these changes to NeoLemmix and what NeoLemmix players expect in levels, not to convince you that NeoLemmix is inherently better than the original game. So summarizing the above: Levels that focus on the execution or have hidden exits or traps might be very nice Lemmings or Lemmix levels, but still be bad NeoLemmix or Lix levels, simply because the genre changed a bit and players expect something different now.
PS: There have been quite a few of totally unfair levels for Lemmix in the past. So a lot of us old guys who grew up with Lemmix or even CustLemm got burned by such levels and hate them now.
A thing about "snowed in"-exits, i.e. where you can see the exit, but the trigger is buried: [...]
Partially covered exits are no problem at all, even in NeoLemmix. As you said, they have their uses. Just make sure you don't just cover the bare minimum required, but at least a third of the exit to make it glaringly obvious that the exit is covered. Otherwise I can almost certainly predict that you'll get a friendly reminder that your level could be improved in this way ;P
Also, at the beginning of that level, the lemmings fall onto a splat pad right from the trap door. There's an anti-splat pad hidden in the ground right underneath. The player doesn't know this. But since you don't have any floaters or gliders, only bombers at the start, and the lemmings fall from the trap door right to their doom, there's not much else you can try to do before you find out the pad is there. ;)
Yes, in some exceptional cases information has to be hidden, because you couldn't manage to design the level otherwise. This is totally fine! IchoTolot argued against making the deliberate choice to hide information as a feature of the level. And personally I have to agree, that this isn't much fun for me, though you'll find quite a few others here in the forum who would agree with your point of view (especially regarding finding hidden exits).
I respect the ambition to be able to solve each level on the first trial by thinking it through. Personally however, I believe the satisfaction about solving it is often even higher when it takes several trials.
I totally agree with you there, and I expect so does everyone else here. But there is a difference between:
- Having to replay, because I missed something, miscalculated the number of skills needed, forgot a lemming somewhere, ... That's perfectly fine.
- Having to go back 5 or 10 seconds to adapt to a hidden trap, while having enough skills to do so without having planned in advance for this trap, is kind of annoying, but not too bad.
- Having to completely change a solution that I had found in my mind and would almost certainly have worked if not for a hidden trap... Now that makes me furious ;)
I've looked at the Black Hole level you mentioned (I guess "Mining Company" was the one you meant), and I get that this is the way to get the maximum out of especially the classic 8 skills, using those in new and creative ways.
Congratulations on solving that level! :thumbsup: I was about to caution you about the extreme difficulty of these levels, but it seems that isn't necessary. And yes, I focused on the classic skills partially because the new skills were only added later and partially because I wanted to see how much new ideas I could find just with them.
Btw. if you have replays of your solutions of the NepsterLems levels, I would be very happy to see them. And any other form of feedback, especially ways to improve my levels and pointers to annoying/misleading parts are more than welcome, too.
-
Thanks for your detailed response, Nepster!
Yes, in some exceptional cases information has to be hidden, because you couldn't manage to design the level otherwise. This is totally fine!
I have attached the level I was talking about for clarification, as well as a replay. I get NeoLemmix doesn't care about the execution by now, but I really like the synergy regarding the timing of bashers and stoners on this one :D .
Concerning timed bombers: Would it be possible to make this optional in the editor for each individual level (instant bombers vs. timed ones)? I have some old levels from WinLems, like one where you had to bomb climbers to get through some poles. The original version was quite challenging, I'd say mid- to late Tricky, whereas now with instant bombers, it's reduced to mid- to late Fun, i'd say :D .
Whenever I want to work with timed bombers now, I have to use radiation, which is even more difficult to execute, imho. To use another German idiom, that's kinda "driving out the devil with Beelzebub": With radiation, the countdown always starts at the same location - the place where the "radiation station" is located ;) . The skill with timed bombers is knowing when to assign them; with radiation, you can only use walkers etc. to steer them into the right direction.
Levels that focus on the execution or have hidden exits or traps might be very nice Lemmings or Lemmix levels, but still be bad NeoLemmix or Lix levels, simply because the genre changed a bit and players expect something different now.
Well, I built the levels using the Neo Lemmix editor - if these levels are compatible with other platforms, I will happily release my pack as a "Lemmix pack" instead ;) . Although features like framestepping and true physics mode are certainly also useful for some of my levels, and if it's just to check whether a trap has been successfully disarmed or not.
Perhaps it's safest to say it is a "Lemmix pack running on the Neo Lemmix engine"? ;)
Congratulations on solving that level! :thumbsup:
Ehm, no, too early for praising me :D , I just watched namida's gameplay of that level and how even he couldn't figure it out. Surprisingly, although I had downloaded all the packs I could find from the NeoLemmix website, I don't have yours yet. I guess it's somewhere here in the forum? My brother and I stopped the video right at the beginning however and calculated different possible attempts. So now I will try to put them into practice :D .
That's another nice feature of Neo Lemmix - being able to play the levels in whatever sequence you want, so getting stuck on a particular level doesn't end the entire game :) .
PS: I saw IchoTolot has started covering your pack on YouTube now, so I have his solutions for checking mine :) ; for some reason, he uploaded the very last level first (I guess because it had come up in our discussion here? ;) ), and now he seems to do it chronologically.
-
Concerning timed bombers: Would it be possible to make this optional in the editor for each individual level (instant bombers vs. timed ones)?
NeoLemmix originally had an option (though it was per-pack, not per-level) and it was removed after a forum discussion: link (http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2369.0). It's safe to say that the ship has sailed on that one.
-
PS: I saw IchoTolot has started covering your pack on YouTube now, so I have his solutions for checking mine :) ; for some reason, he uploaded the very last level first (I guess because it had come up in our discussion here? ;) ), and now he seems to do it chronologically.
I had the last level uploaded a while ago when I first proudly beat it. I waited with the rest of the pack, because I wanted every one of my solutions to be intended/acceptable first (even if it took a lot of fixes from Nepster ;P), as I think very highly of this pack. Now as I finished uploading some other ones, I finally started to upload my solutions. It has nothing to do with this topic ;)
I highly advice you to try and beat the pack yourself before spoiling it. Yes, I know everyone is spitting out warnings that it's too hard and stuff, but here's a thing I find a bit problematic today: People giving up too fast on hard stuff.
I know time is luxury, but back when I got into Lemmings I played a pack, got stuck to death on a level and after hours/days/weeks/even months I beat the level and moved on. Over the time I learned more and more things and the solving process became more and more natural to me. You can't get significally better if you don't let yourself getting stumped on levels and keep on trying until you solve them!
People tend to simply say: "This is too hard for me!" today and give up.....guess what: This isn't helping you! Have perserverance, keep on going, think harder and different, never give up! Otherwise this won't get any better. :8():
-
@Proxima: Thanks for the explanation! So could I download an older version of the Flexi toolkit if I wanted to incorporate timed bombers? Because radiation as the only way of doing this is imho much more frustrating than having the option of timed bombers in the first place. The whole level becomes a "slave" to the position of the radiation station whenever I use one, I feel :( .
I highly advice you to try and beat the pack yourself before spoiling it.
Don't worry, the last level has so much stuff going on that I could hardly memorise it even if I wanted to ^^, and that's all I've watched so far. There don't seem to be any other gameplays of Nepster Lems so far anyway, except for namida's, who got stuck at Mining Company, afaik.
-
@Proxima: Thanks for the explanation! So could I download an older version of the Flexi toolkit if I wanted to incorporate timed bombers? Because radiation as the only way of doing this is imho much more frustrating than having the option of timed bombers in the first place. The whole level becomes a "slave" to the position of the radiation station whenever I use one, I feel :( .
First of all, this is something determined by the NeoLemmix player, not the editor or the Flexi toolkit. So even if you had an old version of the Flexi toolkit, the game would still play with instant bombers. Nevermind that the nxp format has changed a bit in the meantime, so you would have compatibility issues, too.
I have some old levels from WinLems, like one where you had to bomb climbers to get through some poles. The original version was quite challenging, I'd say mid- to late Tricky, whereas now with instant bombers, it's reduced to mid- to late Fun, i'd say :D .
I would guess, that it will be well-received even with instant bombers.
If you want this with timed bombers, then you could play "A TOWERING PROBLEM" (ONML, Wicked 8). So either your level is a nice Fun level showing the player this trick (if this is the main idea for this level), or the player can try lots of things without worrying about the execution and therefore focus on finding the correct path (if this idea is combined with other ideas).
I have attached the level I was talking about for clarification, as well as a replay. I get NeoLemmix doesn't care about the execution by now, but I really like the synergy regarding the timing of bashers and stoners on this one :D .
Great level! Yes, there is some precision in there, but not more than necessary. And for such cases we have framestepping and all the other new features that make life easier.
And here you see the power of instant bombers. :P I guess you would never have created such a level with timed bombers, because the execution would simply be horrible.
Well, I built the levels using the Neo Lemmix editor - if these levels are compatible with other platforms, I will happily release my pack as a "Lemmix pack" instead ;) . Although features like framestepping and true physics mode are certainly also useful for some of my levels, and if it's just to check whether a trap has been successfully disarmed or not.
No, the old Lemmix player can no longer play levels made by the NeoLemmix editor, only the other way around.
There is a separate (though very similar) Lemmix editor together with a Lemmix player, for those who want timed bomber and faithful L1 physics (including all the glitches like blocking away trap trigger areas or bashing through steel). But then you cannot use the new skills or the new types of objects.
-
Great level! Yes, there is some precision in there, but not more than necessary. And for such cases we have framestepping and all the other new features that make life easier.
And here you see the power of instant bombers. :P I guess you would never have created such a level with timed bombers, because the execution would simply be horrible.
Thanks a lot! :) Indeed, I value the existence of instant bombers just as much as everyone else here. It's just a pity to have the two things mutually exclusive.
Therefore, for the sake of "balance" of my argument, attached is a level that was essentially "ruined" - or at least forced into becoming quite different than it had been supposed to be - by the absence of bombers. As the name says, this level is all about cloning for doubling skills, and I would have loved to clone bombers so they walk into opposite directions with the clocks ticking above their heads. Since you mentioned that the cloner and the other new skills are not part of Lemmix, I couldn't create such a level with the Lemmix editor either.
It seems like there are several combinations available currently:
- Lemmix with timed bombers and standard skills only
- Neo Lemmix with new skills, mechanics, and objects, minus timed bombers
- Lix with instant bombers, plus jumpers and batters, which can't be had in the other games
But thinking of Lix and thereby the jumpers gave me an idea, one related to Lemmings 2: The Tribes: Wouldn't it be possible to create two seperate skills for this?
As you might remember, in Lemmings 2: The Tribes, there is a "Bomber" and an "Exploder". The Exploder replaces the classic bomber, i.e. there's a countdown and the lemming dies at the end. The Bomber in Lemmings 2 just places a bomb right where the lemming is standing, i.e. there is no countdown and the lemming does not die.
That took me a while to understand, I was reluctant to use the skill called "Bomber" first because it seemed self-evident to me that the lemming would die, and L2 pretty much gives you the ambition to always save everyone. I still find the idea of a non-lethal bomber odd and therefore don't think this should be implemented, but the main point here is the simultaneous presence of a timed and a non-timed bomber in the same game - just under different names.
Could we transfer that idea to Neo Lemmix? Bombers remain as they are, instant and named "Bombers", and we'd introduce a new skill called "Exploder" which has a countdown? We wouldn't even need a new animation for this, that one could remain the same as for the classic Bomber ;) .
That way, we wouldn't have inconsistency between levels or packs: A player could just look at the skill panel, and whenever there are Bombers, he'll know they're instant, whilst if there are Exploders, it's time to practice aiming ^^.
-
We fought long and hard for timed bombers to be a thing of the past and lived happily every after. I even do not like the radiation/slowfreeze object as it carried a part of this relic over --- they are not even used very often because of that reason.
We could transfer the idea, but I won't support this and don't expect much support from others for this. It results in 2 skills doing the same just differ in a frustraiting timer and L2 is a chaotic example what happens if you've got too many skills with many doing the same/similar things.
There was a comment by Colorful Arty back in the days as he argued about the timed bomber removal as well: "Why make them untimed? There isn't any way to precisely place the other skills as well!" The answer was: Good idea, there should be a way to see how skills work out before they are assigned ----> The birth of the skill blueprints! Away with the execution part!
For the not realizable level ideas: Levels shall emerge from the engine and physics you have. Some things just are not possible and cloning timed bombers to have 2xtimes the frustraition is let's say not a good idea......
Adding new skills is a thing....a very rare thing that has to be thought over in detail. Readding skills that were deliberatly thrown out, because people were sick of them even is a step up from that.
Sorry, but I will gladly stand above the timed bombers grave with a big spade, just to hit them on their head when they try to emerge from their grave again. :8():
For timed bombers ---> Lemmix is there for you.
-
"Why make them untimed? There isn't any way to precisely place the other skills as well!" The answer was: Good idea, there should be a way to see how skills work out before they are assigned ----> The birth of the skill blueprints! Away with the execution part!
Which is why my suggestion would be to add a skill blueprint to the exploder, so the player could see where it is going to explode ;) .
That way, timed exploders wouldn't make you rewind more often than any other skill. I just finished the Comet rank of Nepster Lems, and on that last level I had to rewind dozens of times just to get the diggers right, despite the skill blueprints. Even without, having to rewind for a missplaced exploder would be like having to rewind for missing the activation on a builder. It's not something that messes up your whole strategy for the entire level, like a hidden trap or exit, just a momentary shot that gets revoked right away without any repercussions.
Question: When the timed bombers were removed, did cloners already exist? Because cloners are indeed the main reason for my suggestion. You can't clone an instant bomber. And since Lemmix doesn't have cloners, the different engine won't solve this either.
That's why I disagree that this were a mere execution thing. One of the main challenges of puzzling is the scarcity of resources / skills, right? Cloners are an excellent, not so obvious workaround whenever a player is given few skills. They offer so many solutions that you don't see right away, but they only work to their full potential with moving lemmings.
I don't like radiation either, and that's mainly due to its fixed position. So let's imagine the level I attached in my preceding post: If I give you a single instant bomber, you can't solve it. With a single timed exploder, you can (keeping in mind that the length of the countdown is different to that of radiation, so the horizontal dimensions of the level obviously would have to be adjusted, but the principle is the same).
For the not realizable level ideas: Levels shall emerge from the engine and physics you have.
I understand that approach, especially considering all the effort necessary to implement new features into the game. The strange thing to me is that your team has actually already put in that effort, at an earlier point in time, to make all these options possible first - and then decided to throw them out the window again.
I get that you want to streamline Neo Lemmix into a puzzling game, but as we already saw in the hidden exit-debate, there are at least two camps concerning that matter. When Neo Lemmix is the main engine that gets supported - with the additional skills and objects - while regular Lemmix isn't, there are lots of valid ideas from the "other camp" getting lost that would have been possible with an earlier edition of the editor.
After all, it's not like the presence of a mere option, especially if it has existed at some point in time, endangers the quality of the packs created by people subscribed to a "puzzles only" philosophy, does it? ;) They will continue creating strictly fair puzzles, and other people will toy around with some whacky execution stuff. Where's the harm in tolerating both as long as we know what we're getting into with each pack?
It results in 2 skills doing the same just differ in a frustraiting timer and L2 is a chaotic example what happens if you've got too many skills with many doing the same/similar things.
Glad you mention this, because concerning L2, I was thinking the same ;) . A stomper is really just another digger, a kayaker is a temporary swimmer, a scooper is a slightly more steep miner, an attractor is a different form of blocker... lot's of variations, yet there's little that's actually new.
I have been asking myself this question for the Neo Lemmix skills, too, however. Do we really need blockers, stoners, and stackers? Stackers often cause the death of a lemming, too, because at least one easily slips by. The same could be asked for gliders and floaters.
I do however believe that each of these Neo Lemmix skills adds something unique and valuable - stackers can create walls to climb, stoners can block climbers like a blocker while at the same time serving as surrogate builders to close gaps or break high falls. Gliders have the interaction with the updraft, and the fencer, in contrast to L2 where it was just a basher with a light "updraft", is now a legitimate "upward miner". The skills are similar, but not the same, and therefore I see a cloneable exploder in the same vein as the other ones :) .
-
Even with blueprints --- the skills would be too similar for the new one to have a reason to exist.
Just to have a timer and the possibility to clone the timer is by far not enough to justify a new skill and we must repel the L2 skill overload disaster. Adding skills carelessly is the path to ruin. I would simply throw the level idea away and make something better. Just because a few level ideas are impossible a new skill isn't automatically justified.
I understand that approach, especially considering all the effort necessary to implement new features into the game. The strange thing to me is that your team has actually already put in that effort, at an earlier point in time, to make all these options possible first - and then decided to throw them out the window again.
I get that you want to streamline Neo Lemmix into a puzzling game, but as we already saw in the hidden exit-debate, there are at least two camps concerning that matter. When Neo Lemmix is the main engine that gets supported - with the additional skills and objects - while regular Lemmix isn't, there are lots of valid ideas from the "other camp" getting lost that would have been possible with an earlier edition of the editor.
After all, it's not like the presence of a mere option, especially if it has existed at some point in time, endangers the quality of the packs created by people subscribed to a "puzzles only" philosophy, does it? ;) They will continue creating strictly fair puzzles, and other people will toy around with some whacky execution stuff. Where's the harm in tolerating both as long as we know what we're getting into with each pack?
Namida put in effort to add things, saw that most of them were complete garbage and throw them out again. This was one of the best decisions ever made and we learned from that not to throw in everything that could support a few new ideas. We deliberatly decided to throw out these old ideas with a great majority of people supporting it. I don't count the timer idea as valid anymore.
The presence of an option is by far the most dangerous and false thing you can do, 100% more dangerous than adding in a new skill. The physics of the game depending on an per pack option is a disaster. The game has 1 configuration for all packs and the player can expect the same physics for all levels. The harm of tolerating both is limitless and it's against the rules of game design. This would also make way to maybe more options which even amplify the chaos.
The golden rule: 1 game, 1 physics set, no options!
Blockers, stackers and stoners:
Blockers:
- instant
- turning interaction with other skills (miners, builders, bashers)
- turning interaction with fallers
- can/must be freed
Stackers:
- need time
- great potential on using the slipping over lemmings to create interesting effects
- climable wall
- diggable wall
- can close and block small gaps
Stoners:
- instant
- can be assigned mid air
- lose you a lemming
- diggable wall
- great potential in fall height reduction
- can close small gaps
In fact in our IRC chat another idea came up over this discussion: Cull radiation and slowfreeze! (And I am normally the conservative voice here on the side of keeping old things and maintain backwards compability rather than introducing big changes.)
This would reduce complexity, which could better be used for neutral lemmings.
-
I understand that approach, especially considering all the effort necessary to implement new features into the game. The strange thing to me is that your team has actually already put in that effort, at an earlier point in time, to make all these options possible first - and then decided to throw them out the window again.
Firstly, there wasn't a "team" until recent versions, long after the debates over gimmicks, timed bombers etc. had been settled, when Nepster started helping out with NeoLemmix development. Up till then, it was namida's solo effort. Many of the large changes, such as the addition of gimmicks, new objects and new skills, were tied in with the development of namida's own packs, and the community didn't know about the new features, let alone have input on them, until the packs were released.
That changed gradually, as the community came to embrace NeoLemmix as one of the main engines for creating new content, namida stopped releasing packs and concentrated on improving the engine, and got into the habit of asking the community what they wanted to see in further updates.
As for why we threw out existing options... gimmicks made the code a complete mess, and the new features we really wanted would have cost a lot more work because they had to be compatible with gimmicks. So it was a huge saving of effort to throw them out. Timed bombers, of course, existed in Lemmings Plus I because the engine was directly based on that of original Lemmings, with only a few small tweaks. Even Lix originally had them, because it was imitating the original game. Then namida released Lemmings Plus II, with the novelty of untimed bombers. Simon (developer of Lix) jumped on this idea and strongly pushed for switching to untimed. For a while, NeoLemmix offered both, simply because untimed bombers were a novelty; but considering that all the active content creators were using untimed bombers, it was natural to abandon the timed bombers option.
I get that you want to streamline Neo Lemmix into a puzzling game, but as we already saw in the hidden exit-debate, there are at least two camps concerning that matter. When Neo Lemmix is the main engine that gets supported - with the additional skills and objects - while regular Lemmix isn't, there are lots of valid ideas from the "other camp" getting lost that would have been possible with an earlier edition of the editor.
The thing is, NeoLemmix has an active community producing new content for it. Perhaps original Lemmix does, somewhere. But no-one on this forum is making new Lemmix content. So why should anyone put in the effort to add new features to original Lemmix?
After all, it's not like the presence of a mere option, especially if it has existed at some point in time, endangers the quality of the packs created by people subscribed to a "puzzles only" philosophy, does it? ;) They will continue creating strictly fair puzzles, and other people will toy around with some whacky execution stuff. Where's the harm in tolerating both as long as we know what we're getting into with each pack?
There's no harm in different games existing. There's a lot of harm in one game trying to be everything. NeoLemmix has framestepping tools to make execution as simple as possible; there's very little satisfaction in pulling off challenging execution when the engine gives you that much help.
-
Let me add some more points to Proxima's post: Some of the objects (like Radiation and Slowfreeze) and some of the skills (like the Disarmer or the Stoner) are more of a reason why we are hesitant about adding new skills, not arguments for adding skills that have somewhat similar functions.
Why? As Proxima already said, namida added these features at some point, because they looked like cool additions. But while they added complexity to the game, they weren't flexible enough to allow lots of new interesting levels. We learned from this experience and now try to avoid making the same mistake again.
Question: When the timed bombers were removed, did cloners already exist? Because cloners are indeed the main reason for my suggestion. You can't clone an instant bomber.
If I remember correctly, timed bombers were removed shortly after cloners were added to the game. At that point no level existed that cloned a bomber.
Wouldn't it be possible to create two seperate skills for this? [...] a "Bomber" and an "Exploder".
For this you really have to convince us, that there are a lot of new puzzle ideas that will become possible with the Exploder. Currently your arguments are:
- Allows cloning of bombers: Yes, that would be one nice puzzle idea. But overall this alone is of very limited use, because it only applies to a very specific situation.
- Whacky execution levels: One can already play the original games or build such levels in Lemmix, if one wants them. Yes, Lemmix limits you in other ways, but until recently it has been more than enough for people to completely satisfy their desire for levels focusing on execution.
So overall you will have to come up with a lot more convincing arguments, before we consider implementing Exploders. There is no shortage of ideas for new features, with the best candidates being currently:
- Exits that restrict the number or types of lemmings who can enter (http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=3308.0).
- Some version of the L2 Shimmier (http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=3276.0).
- And possibly the jumper, though getting the physics right will be extremely difficult.
Which is why my suggestion would be to add a skill blueprint to the exploder, so the player could see where it is going to explode ;) .
Excellent point! I just realized that the current version lacks blueprints for lemmings walking through Radiation or Slowfreeze objects!
I get that you want to streamline Neo Lemmix into a puzzling game, but as we already saw in the hidden exit-debate, there are at least two camps concerning that matter. When Neo Lemmix is the main engine that gets supported - with the additional skills and objects - while regular Lemmix isn't, there are lots of valid ideas from the "other camp" getting lost that would have been possible with an earlier edition of the editor.
This is certainly a very valid concern. But the main problem here is, that the current developers (namida and myself for NeoLemmix and Simon for Lix) are in one camp and think that focusing on the puzzle aspect is the way to go.
Both games are open source, so you are more than welcome to use their source code to create and support your own engine, where you can add the timing aspect and any new skill you like. We welcome any new lemmings clones here and will certainly try them out!
-
there's very little satisfaction in pulling off challenging execution when the engine gives you that much help.
I know it's tempting to use any help given, but we're not forced to do so, are we? Pit Droids - and, as far as I could tell, Lix as well - also have the option of giving you "tipps" on how to solve the level. This means, where framestepping, replay function and skill blueprints facilitate the execution, tipps facilitate the puzzling aspect. Yet, most of us probably would have the pride not to use the tipps unless absolutely necessary ;) , wouldn't we?
The same could be applied to execution based levels. Yes, of course I could rush through We all fall down in Neo Lemmix by setting the release rate to 99 and playing the entire level with the pause button turned on. But instead, I enjoy the breath of fresh air of having a reaction- and timing based level, especially if the preceding one was a puzzly one that "tied a knot into my mind" ^^.
The presence of an option is by far the most dangerous and false thing you can do,
Well, dangerous to what, exactly? The philosophy? If you're the conservative voice, I guess that makes me the libertarian one :D , in this case advising for a "free market of ideas": I believe if the community generally agrees that puzzling levels are the best levels anyway, the packs that you, namida, Nepster & Co. create will still come out on top as the most popular packs. In contrast, packs that use a lot of "mean" stuff or just elements that are not favoured by the community will not become popular and therefore won't have a huge impact, neither positive nor negative. So I don't really see what you would have to fear. ;)
If it's about the complexity of the code, which I believe someone mentioned - old code interfering with new one, so the old one was removed - that's a pragmatic reason I can understand easily. There's no need to put in 80% more effort for something that would probably get used 20% of the time or less. I wouldn't ask for any of this if it had to be created all anew; I only do so because it did exist at an earlier point in time.
But no-one on this forum is making new Lemmix content. So why should anyone put in the effort to add new features to original Lemmix?
Exactly. I enjoy the features of Neo Lemmix myself, after all, so I don't see the use in distributing this stuff across different platforms. Philosophically however, my pack will probably be "new Lemmix content" indeed ;) . At least if I understood the philosophy of Lemmix correctly.
So overall you will have to come up with a lot more convincing arguments, before we consider implementing Exploders. There is no shortage of ideas for new features, with the best candidates being currently:
- Exits that restrict the number or types of lemmings who can enter.
- Some version of the L2 Shimmier.
- And possibly the jumper, though getting the physics right will be extremely difficult.
The jumper certainly would be much higher on my priority list than timed exploders ;) , so we seem to have common ground there. If I understood it correctly, the issue with the jumper is that knockback is needed? I saw that Lix has knockback, and so has Lemmings 2.
So perhaps let me chime in on that: Have any of you ever played Pingus? It's a Linux clone, but, as the name implies, you command a horde of penguins rather than lemmings. It features exactly the same skills as regular lemmings, plus a jumper, and it has no knockback:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLXIT59il6o&spfreload=10
(Nevermind that the video is in German, it's just about demonstrating the skills.)
Limited number-exits would be another feature familiar to me from Pit Droids. Since I've described that game as about as puzzly as it gets, I predict the Neo Lemmix community is going to enjoy that! ;)
I also like the Shimmier, I think it has been used way too little in L2. My main issue with that game is actually not the huge choice of skills itself, but rather the ridiculousness of some skills, or how they are almost purely execution-based (Super-Lemming, Jet Pack, Twister etc.). There are skills that can solve a level single-handedly if a player knows how to handle them, or be the reason for him getting stuck just because he can't handle a Jet Pack. These skills, in combination with knockback, turned Lemmings 2: The Tribes into Worms for me :D . Still, I wouldn't want them to be removed from that game; apparently, I just need to keep practicing using the jet pack ^^.
I am however always in favour of skills that "fill gaps", by doing things no other skill can, but might be needed frequently. Sometimes they fill gaps literally, like the Glue Pourer (which usually makes Fillers and Sand Pourers redundant). But also some way of upward digging. I noticed that the Laser Blaster has been suggested as well, with the concern being that it broke too many levels on Lemmings 2 - many Laser Blasters lead the rest of the crowd from the trap door right to the exit. But that's an issue that could easily be solved by stretching out levels or adding steel.
Something that never occured on any Lemmings game is a downward builder (unless we want to count the roper). Upward digging and downward building are pretty much the only "gaps" remaining; apart from that, lemmings can both create and destroy into any direction.
Excellent point! I just realized that the current version lacks blueprints for lemmings walking through Radiation or Slowfreeze objects!
I'd certainly prefer that over throwing them out entirely, as IchoTolot suggested ;) . Because that would either create more inconsistency - older packs including radiation & slowfreeze, making newer players think "I want that, too, why is it gone?" - or all the old levels that contain radiation / slowfreeze would have to be revamped; which we can probably all agree on would be loads of unnecessary work ;) .
Giving blueprints to radiation & slowfreeze would also be a good way to test the waters for walking bombers & stoners without having to (re-)create a skill such as the exploder. Let's just improve upon these already existing objects first, especially before we throw them out entirely. Perhaps people will like the blueprints for those objects, and if so, exploders could be reconsidered. If not... I guess most level creators would just stop using radiation & slowfreeze anyway in that case, since the prevalence already seems to be quite low at the moment ;) .
Both games are open source, so you are more than welcome to use their source code to create and support your own engine, where you can add the timing aspect and any new skill you like.
Yeah, I thought about looking into that ;) , especially after one of you said that "Zombies pressing buttons" thing would only take a few lines of code. However, I'm only somewhat familiar with Python so far, so unless NeoLemmix is based on that, this will certainly be more of a long-term thing :D .
-
I know it's tempting to use any help given, but we're not forced to do so, are we? Pit Droids - and, as far as I could tell, Lix as well - also have the option of giving you "tipps" on how to solve the level. This means, where framestepping, replay function and skill blueprints facilitate the execution, tipps facilitate the puzzling aspect. Yet, most of us probably would have the pride not to use the tipps unless absolutely necessary ;) , wouldn't we?
Lix doesn't have in-game hints at the moment, no. It's a feature that's been talked about, but never added; I think at the moment Simon is inclined against it, and certainly there are higher priorities right now.
In any case, this is wandering away from what I was trying to say about options, which is....
The presence of an option is by far the most dangerous and false thing you can do,
Well, dangerous to what, exactly?
The harm of having options for different physics within a single game is, firstly, that there's more for new players to learn, so the game is less inviting to its potential audience. There's the question of how to communicate this information to new players -- bearing in mind that if we don't make really sure of that, the player will sooner or later stumble on a level that seems impossible to them because they are expecting one set of physics when the game uses a different set. And finally, even when players learn that the option exists, there's an extra burden of having to remember which physics are in play at the moment, for every single level you play.
The jumper certainly would be much higher on my priority list than timed exploders ;) , so we seem to have common ground there. If I understood it correctly, the issue with the jumper is that knockback is needed? I saw that Lix has knockback, and so has Lemmings 2.
Yes, the main problem with jumpers is that you have to have tumbler physics to deal with all the cases where the jump doesn't go as expected :lix-tongue:
I noticed that the Laser Blaster has been suggested as well, with the concern being that it broke too many levels on Lemmings 2 - many Laser Blasters lead the rest of the crowd from the trap door right to the exit. But that's an issue that could easily be solved by stretching out levels or adding steel.
That wasn't really the concern; it's more that every appearance of the laser blaster in L2 was the same old, same old "trap the crowd, one lem does all the work, laser blast to release". It's possible that the skill could be used imaginatively even though L2 doesn't (like the fencer); but at the moment it's not clear whether the skill brings enough to the game to be worth adding.
I'd certainly prefer that over throwing them out entirely, as IchoTolot suggested ;) . Because that would either create more inconsistency - older packs including radiation & slowfreeze, making newer players think "I want that, too, why is it gone?" - or all the old levels that contain radiation / slowfreeze would have to be revamped; which we can probably all agree on would be loads of unnecessary work ;) .
Those levels would only have to be revamped if we insist on all packs keeping the same number of levels. Perhaps some levels would simply be dropped from packs, as has happened with other removed features (ghosts in NL, trampolines in Lix). But yes, every time a feature is removed, some work has to be done in looking over old levels and deciding what to do with them. Generally, in the "culling" discussions we've had, the discussion centres on how much the feature is currently used, how much work culling would involve, and whether the benefit of a simpler, more learnable game is worth it. As you can see, in several cases we have decided to cull features in spite of adding to pack maintainers' workload; in other cases (e.g. zombies) it was decided that the feature should be kept. The "inconsistency" with older versions is simply never brought up, because only the newest version should be used for making new content.
-
The harm of having options for different physics within a single game is, firstly, that there's more for new players to learn, so the game is less inviting to its potential audience.
Okay, that's a new aspect I didn't consider so far. Most packs I looked at, either playing them myself or watching Let's Plays, seem to be clearly oriented towards an audience already familiar with (most) official Lemmings games, where often even the lower ranks are already much more difficult than a level of equivalent position in e.g. Fun or Tricky. The general impression I get from these packs is that you should have finished original Lemmings first (or at least played it a lot) before even attempting one of the custom-made ones.
Even my pack, though I created tutorial levels for the new skills on the lowest rank, sort-of implies that you know the basic eight skills already.
-
The jumper certainly would be much higher on my priority list than timed exploders ;) , so we seem to have common ground there. If I understood it correctly, the issue with the jumper is that knockback is needed? I saw that Lix has knockback, and so has Lemmings 2.
Despite what Proxima says, jumpers might be doable without tumbler physics, if they fall stright down after a while or when they hit the ceiling.
More problematic is the testing, that it works as intended in all terrain circumstances and interacting with all terrain layouts. Over the time we have weeded out about a dozen builder glitches, and the builder consists only of two different lemming actions per cycle and three different types of terrain checks. The jumper would need a lot more, which just yields much more space where glitches may hide. :P
I am however always in favour of skills that "fill gaps", by doing things no other skill can, but might be needed frequently. [...] Laser Blaster [...]
I already replied concerning the pourer skills and the laser blaster in the other thread (http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=3276.0). If you have further input concerning these skills, please post it there. It's easier for everyone (and especially namida and myself) if all the discussion about adding L2 skills to NeoLemmix is in one place. ;)
Something that never occured on any Lemmings game is a downward builder (unless we want to count the roper). Upward digging and downward building are pretty much the only "gaps" remaining; apart from that, lemmings can both create and destroy into any direction.
This suggestion came up already, too, but I cannot find the thread at the moment. IIRC the conclusion was, that this may sound like something that is missing, but actually almost all levels ideas for them work equally well with platformers if you modify the terrain slightly.
Excellent point! I just realized that the current version lacks blueprints for lemmings walking through Radiation or Slowfreeze objects!
I'd certainly prefer that over throwing them out entirely, as IchoTolot suggested ;) .
I totally agree with you here. But as namida has the most levels containing these objects, he has to make the decision to cull them.
However, I'm only somewhat familiar with Python so far, so unless NeoLemmix is based on that, this will certainly be more of a long-term thing :D .
No, NeoLemmix is written in Delphi (because its code is based on the Lemmix code, which was already in Delphi). The main problem with Delphi is the expensive IDE and compiler. PM namida if you need further input concerning the Delphi IDEs.
Lix is written in D, which has free IDEs and compilers, but Simon has an extremely object-oriented programming style which may be hard to read if you are only used to the precedural style common to short Python scripts.
-
This suggestion came up already, too, but I cannot find the thread at the moment. IIRC the conclusion was, that this may sound like something that is missing, but actually almost all levels ideas for them work equally well with platformers if you modify the terrain slightly.
It's the thread where Namida first proposed adding the fencer. (http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2801.msg59053#msg59053)
-
The jumper certainly would be much higher on my priority list than timed exploders ;) , so we seem to have common ground there. If I understood it correctly, the issue with the jumper is that knockback is needed? I saw that Lix has knockback, and so has Lemmings 2.
Yes, the main problem with jumpers is that you have to have tumbler physics to deal with all the cases where the jump doesn't go as expected :lix-tongue:
Disagree. Lix chose to introduce a new Tumbler state for jumpers to transition to. NeoLemmix could instead opt for the alternative option of simply having them become a faller when the jump ends.
NeoLemmix also already has the Glider, which a "Tumbler" would probably share many similarities with. The glider has been debugged very intensively, so more or less reusing its code could achieve the desired effect.